Oregon's new Defensive Coordinator has a plan.
So the new coordinator has a plan, Play Defense.
“Whose wise idea was it to pair the Bend-but-don’t-Break-Defense with the Oregon Offense?”
That defense works….I know as I’ve coached it, but why would you pair it with an offense that has been in the top five in the nation for scoring in each of the last five years? Oregon is known for rapid scoring, having some of the highest numbers of under-two minute drives in the nation. An offense like that can score a TON, so why pair it with a defense that is designed to be out on the field for long stretches–and keeps this scoring machine off the field?”
I am sure it started with "Um, Well". I didn't mention the coach because I think the theory stands on it's own.
http://fishduck.com/2016/06/oregon-offensive-scoring-records-will-fall-due-to-brady-hoke/
and RR wouldn't let him switch to the D that would work.
...that it was necessary for the DC to adapt to them? Wouldn't it make more sense to coordinate your hirings so you have assistants able and willing to run a defense your coordinator knows how to operate?
Putting aside the disaster that Hoke was as a head coach at Michigan, his new role as the DC at Oregon is going to prove the biggest challenge of his coaching career. It will be very entertaining to watch whether or not he can transform their D into something more than sieve and not end up as a scape goat like what happened to Shafer under RR. I hope he is successful
Mike Tyson said, "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face." We will see if Coach can take a punch. He could do what no one has done, a spread team with a true D, after loosing his dream job. That would be tough guy football. It is not easy to lick your wounds and keep going.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I don't think they were a bend but don't break d. They were fairly agressive. But it would fit with the theory, the Ducks can score, so you want them on the field. We couldn't so you want to drain the clock.
I was aware. Just not fully aware.
I would suspect that plan includes a lot of hand-clapping and saying "let's go".
I would suspect that plan includes a lot of hand-clapping and saying "let's go".
No need to pile on Hoke. He was in over his head here, but he's not the enemy. He loved Michigan and tried to do his best.
He's found his sweet spot as a DC, and I wish him well there.
I will watch with fascination when the Oregon D plays the Arizona O.
I don't know how much DC Hoke has in him, but I wish him well. Pairing that Oregon offense with a good defense, that can stand up to the big boys with a ball control, pro-type offense, would make for a dangerous team. I can see why Helfrin would want to try that. I just don't know if he chose the right DC for the job. That DL will improve - that much we know. LBs and secondary, though? I dunno... I'm not sure if Hoke is agressive enough as a DC to keep that Oregon scoring machine on the field.
I wish him well, but there's no track record of Hoke defenses to predict. And don't give me his D's at Michigan! Mattison controlled those.
He's going to design a 3 and out defense to get the offense back out on the field. I don't know why no other college coach has thought of this.
"ALERT: The following quotes by Defensive Coordinator Brady Hoke are NOT accurate. He stated a very polite version of what you will read, and I dramatized it to make a point...."
I doubt MGoBlog allows this.
"We are going to storm that field, rip their balls off, & sing them a lullaby!"
"We are going to storm that field and profusely apologize for any damage incurred in the process."
Actually, the Bend Don't Break makes perfect sense for a team like Oregon. You're kind of letting the opposition hold the ball, resting your offense (which is running 6 plays per second), and letting a dink and dunk offense down the field to where the defense compresses and makes it hard for teams to score. You're basically saying we'll trade touchdowns for field goals thank you very much.
It's a shame that that is not what they will be running, then.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Then I guess that's why they fired the other guy.
Except that also rests your opponents defense who you want to tire out. You use more energy on defense than offense so the defense tires out first. You're better off having a high risk high reward defense that focuses on negative plays and takeaways. Get the ball back quickly whether your oppenent scores of turns it over and get your offense back on the field.
A main point of the tempo offense is to wear down the opposing defense. Why would you want to give them a long rest between possessions? The offense can always slow down or sub out players if it really needs to.
Well it's at least better than Greg Robinson's "bend-then-shatter" defense.
Sometimes it was just "shatter", please see one Williams, Juice.
I'll never forget watching Mike Williams try to defend Juice on the zone read. There have been very few times that I thought I could do a better job than the UofM player on the field. That was one of them.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
The stoppable force meets the movable object.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Yea I don't understand where any of you posters are coming from with "rest the offense". The offense is not who ANY coach would be concerned about getting rest. If the Ducks offense is doing what it is suppose to the defense will play more snaps and that is concerning. The more snaps the defense plays the more chances they have to give up points.
I think the quotes suggest turning into a defense that takes chances and goes after turnovers instead of keeping the ball in front of them and playing tough red zone defense. There are many NFL defenses I can think of that took this approach. When the Saints won the Super Bowl in 2009 they had the number 1 offense and while they had the 20th ranked defense they were second in the leage with 39 turnovers! Any high powered offense would take that knowing that while you might score points those turnovers will turn the game and give the high powered offense more chances.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sounds about right. And if that happens... Helfrich's seat is going to be scorching hot
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
“The Oregon defense this year will be attacking and unpredictable; we will force early punts, turnovers, and occasionally when the opponent scores a quick touchdown on the Ducks … who trots back on the field? The OREGON OFFENSE!”
The classic but apparently never-old "Late June Defensive Coordinator Presser Speech", just tailored for Oregon. Well-delivered indeed.
It will be different to see Oregon in a 4-3 on defense at all though, so I suppose we shall see. This was an interesting choice, to say the least, for DC at Oregon, so I will make it a point to catch a game or two.
When he first took the Oregon job I was listening to the Sports talk station here in Portland. I had just missed the interview they had with him, but the hosts were still talking about it. They were joking on whether he had fallen asleep or had some kind of seizure during the interview.
It's more your first point. Oregon actually had some really good defenses according to advanced stats during the Chip Kelly years, but they gave up a lot of points because a) the defense was on the field a lot and b) the rapid pace at which Oregon would score would give the opposing offenses more possessions, and thus more chances to score themselves.
So it's more a tempo thing than anything else. Like in basketball, UNC will give up a lot of points because their games typically have a lot more possessions than say a Wisconsin game. But UNC could have a better defense by other measures, such as points per possession allowed.